The fact is, some people just are deluded by their ideology, so it’s not arrogant to say this about some groups. I’m naming: Antifa, and Men’s Rights Activists. These delusions are very deep-seated and savage, and hard to break out from, because they’re self-defeating, impervious, and “self-healing” – any little hole in the delusion gets healed over straight away by the delusion itself.

I challenge anyone to have a rational conversation with someone who’s “lights on nobody in”. Both sets of people have let themselves be turned into pull-the-string dolls: blank robots who are unable to think rationally and have their eyes closed. In fact, both are known for their “dead eyes”.

In both cases, what they call a political ideology, or life philosophy, is really an all-encompassing ego defense.

In the case of the MRAs, they’re actually the less harmful of the two. Their ego defense is avoidance: it’s probably a male way of avoiding feminism, for all the usual backward idiotic male reasons. We can see that among themselves, there’s an atmosphere of calm solidarity and brotherly support. So even though they’ve completely gone wrong mentally, and their life is down the drain, they’re actually quite nice in their funny way.

Antifa / SJW / regressive left are like a pit of angry dogs, just as likely to turn on each other as on a normal member of the public who is wearing the wrong colour underwear. Their ego defense is “bullying” through the medium of “moral superiority”, and the problem is, they can and will use violence. So, it’s a toxic sewer.

Both of these are like an unwitting trap, a one-way door, and once you go through, you don’t even realise you’ve been taken over, because the nature of the delusion is to remove any countering information from consciousness. So, some people probably never make it out again. Both of them play to some of the worst and most useless sides of human nature. It’s humorous that the MRAs have the “red-pill” of the Matrix as their metaphor, because they’re the ones lost down the rabbit hole, or whatever the story is, all the while proclaiming that they’re really the ones in the know, and all of us manginas and white knights are just sad losers.

However, I find Dawkins and Dennett arrogant because they think they know all about religion, when it’s clear that they have just not done their homework, and what’s more, when a religious person tries to defend their position, D and D won’t listen, they dismiss everything they say on the grounds that the person is a deluded fool. This is just bad practise. Any recognition of goodness in religion is, again, a matter of imposing their own pre-existing beliefs on the situation.

I have already answered your question here twice (just like with your “what evidence would you need for God”) and other users here have answered this question at length to no avail. It is infuriating retyping the same thought-out explanation again and again. So…I will take it one step at a time in a socratic form. But first:

We evolved to form world views…not to believe in God. Your claim is UTTERLY FALSE. The world views which humans have usually emerge as VERY STRANGE ones. But they do not inevitably mean believing in a God. Some cultures end up believing in GOD…most do not. God believers represented about 10% of the world until around 50AD and only 30% of the world as of 1800. That increase was mostly due to forced conversion (under the threat of death). It has now increased to just over 50% because of colonialism (again forced on people through manipulation or the sword). So…until recently you God believers were the minority and you are still a small majority (falling in many places as people break free of the God delusion and become non-believers). You are taking your own world view (believing in God) and generalizing about humanity in general (who do not invariably believe in God but some other world view) as though your experience is representative of everyone else. This is a major fallacious way of thinking. We evolved to form world views. Not end up believing in God. There is more to the world than the United States and the history of Western civilization. Let’s try the socratic method:

Question 1: Do lesser animals have world views? Chimpansees for example?

That is NOT EVIDENCE! Being happy or not has nothing to do about whether a God does exist. And in any case you are citing this study in a falcious way. This study compares believers and non-believers in a country where non-believers face ostracism and discrimination. You cannot generalise about a comparative study in a country like the United States or Poland where non-believers face difficulties. Atheists and Christians are not on equal footing and in some states many atheists are in the closet. It is not a fair comparison.

You have to take a country like Denmark, New Zealand, Canada and Sweden (all majority non-believers and in the top 10 list of the worlds happiest countries). In Sweden for example believers and non-believers face no social discrimination and no other factors that interfere with having a decent quality of life (which is easy because in Sweden they have a very generous social security). For a fair comparison of who is happier, believers or non-believers you need a sample from a country like this. Turns out there is little difference per happiness. And as a bonus Swedish people are amongst the happiest in the Word. And yet the majority are atheists! Same with the other nordic countries and Canada. They also have a far kinder system than the US where welfare and a de-facto income make sure that very few people live on the streets (America has millions), equality of the sexes is growing, disparity between rich and poor is low, education is free and criminals are rehabilitated instead of thrown in jail in the millions in the US for a simple pot conviction.

How is it possible that these atheist majority countries are happier than Christian america…as well as kinder and fairer?

I’m not sure why you’re trying to pass judgement on these things as “good or bad.

Because not all traits we have that came from evolution are beneficial or good. And we have evolved some features for no good reason. And some of the features we have evolved were useful in the past but now they are not. And some features, despite them being a liability…ARE DIFFICULT TO GET RID OF (especially the mental ones).

Davis honestly I’m sorry. I’ve been taking out a lot of my anger and frustration out on the forum for things that have nothing to do with atheism. I’m going through a really complicated process of grief right now. It took me a while to figure it out. I’m having to go back and ask a lot of questions I did before because the first time I don’t think I really discovered it for myself. I was trying to survive and be “ok” and I had to leave my ex and get to my independence. It took me this long to actually start to realize that I really have no sense of self and I really don’t know who I am. I’m only just now figuring it out. So I know you’re frustrated but it’s honestly for me especially lately I’ve been really angry. I wasn’t ever angry before. I’m not an “angry” person. But lately I have been. I’m angry and confused. So I’m sort of being difficult on purpose. It’s not right. But I am. I’m trying to really get to where I really know that I’ve discovered truth for myself. Not because someone told me….my whole life my truth has been based on what I was told was true.

I just had to rehash years worth of abuse IN DETAIL to a social worker today and it was a reminder of how…,Just everything. I’m trying SO hard to get better. Right now I’m going through complicated grief and mostly about stuff related to my PTSD and trauma. Religion and atheism was a convenient mask for my anger and sadness. I’m sorry. So yeah I don’t know what I believe or who I am right now. Honestly.

As far as your question:

Question 1: Do lesser animals have world views? Chimpansees for example?

I think so but it’s more like they have culture and customs and social norms…

Don’t ever take anyone’s word for anything important until you DO think about it. Sometimes searching for what works best is more important than searching for some ultimate truth but don’t take my word for it 🙂

Like for example why would it be good for me to pray with my son if it isn’t true and there is no God? You know? Most of my questions and frustrations really are around mental health issues. I have found that with my son there are many things about prayer and going to church that are beneficial. The benefits are things that I cannot get anywhere else. And it is frustrating to me to think that I have to dumb down to some type of alternative truth just to be able to get the help that we need.

@bellerose – “Like for example why would it be good for me to pray with my son if it isn’t true and there is no God?”

– if you think about it, this would be good for you whether there was a God or not.

“dumb down to some type of alternative truth”

– I don’t know which alternative you’re referring to. The “central spiritual thrust”, i.e. the valuable part, philosophically, of the religion, can be shown to be solidly and indisputably true. At least, as true as the theory of evolution, because it springs directly from that.

So, in many ways, but probably not all, it’s irrelevant whether or not there is a God. Some people have an emotional attachment to the idea of a Heavenly Father.